employee from 01.01.2018 until now
Moscow, Russian Federation
UDC 159.9
Introduction. Most current theoretical explanations of “how polygraph testing works” are done within the framework of an outdated stimulus-reactive paradigm. This article attempts to analyse the manifestations of this paradigm in the phenomena within the problematic field of polygraph-based research. Methods. The study employed the following methods: analysis of scientific and methodological literature; analysis of regulatory, legal, and methodological documents governing the conduct of polygraph examinations; and analysis of activity products – namely, expert reports based on the results of polygraph examinations. Results. The theory and practice of polygraph examinations face several key challenges: the issue of the “psychophysiological phenomenon”; the issue of the correlation between a psychological stimulus and a physiological response; the issue of determining the “significance” of a stimulus; the issue of the phenomenology of “memory traces”; and the issue of the scientific incorrectness of expert conclusions based on polygraph examination results, among others. The analysis suggests that these problems are a consequence of the predominance of the stimulus-reactive paradigm in the theoretical justification and practical application of the “polygraph method”. This paradigm rejects the primacy of internal determinants of human activity over external ones and ignores modern achievements in sciences such as psychology and psychophysiology. This paper argues that polygraph examination, as a form of instrumental psychological experiment, must develop its theoretical and methodological foundations in accordance with modern scientific perspectives on human activity within natural life contexts.
polygraph, stimulus-reactive paradigm, psychophysiological phenomenon, stimulus significance, ideal trace
1. Feygenberg I. M. Reaktivnost' ili aktivnost'? (Smena paradigm v neyrofiziologii) // Voprosy filosofii. 2007. № 11. S. 133–142.
2. Aleksandrov Yu. I. Chemu i kak my uchimsya v raznyh kul'turah // Shkol'naya biblioteka. 2014. № 9–10. S. 26–35.
3. Shvyrkov V. B. Psihofiziologicheskoe izuchenie struktury sub'ektivnogo otrazheniya // Psihologicheskiy zhurnal. 1985. T. 6, № 3. S. 22–37.
4. Holodnyy Yu. I. Opros s ispol'zovaniem poligrafa i ego estestvennonauchnye osnovy // Vestnik kriminalistiki. 2005. № 1 (13). S. 39-48.
5. Kornilov K. N. Uchenie o reakciyah cheloveka c psihologicheskoy tochki zreniya («Reaktologiya») : Eksperimental'no-psihologicheskoe issledovanie iz Laboratorii Psihologicheskogo nauchno-issledovatel'skogo instituta pri Moskovskom universitete. Moskva : Gosudarstvennoe izdatel'stvo, [1922]. 228 s.
6. Reaktologicheskaya diskussiya v psihologicheskom institute : [Luriya A. R. Ob izuchenii reakciy i istoricheskom razvitii povedeniya cheloveka] // Voprosy psihologii. 1994. № 2. S. 21–31.
7. Kupcova D. M., Kamenskov M. Yu. Teoreticheskaya model' testirovaniya na poligrafe: problemy i perspektivy ih razresheniya // Psihologiya i pravo. 2020. T. 10, № 4. S. 126–138. https://doi.org/10.17759/psylaw.2020100409
8. Kleiner M. Physiological detection of deception in psychological perspectives: A theoretical proposal // Handbook of polygraph testing. London, UK : Academic Press, 2002. R. 127–182.
9. Holodnyy Yu. I. Opros s ispol'zovaniem poligrafa i ego estestvennonauchnye osnovy // Vestnik kriminalistiki. 2005. Vyp. 1 (13). S. 39–48.
10. Shvyrkov V. B. Neyrofiziologicheskoe izuchenie sistemnyh mehanizmov poveleniya. Moskva : Nauka. 1978. 240 s.
11. Sozinov A. A., Aleksandrov I. O., Gorkin A. G., Grechenko T. N., Aleksandrov Yu. I. Konsolidaciya, rekonsolidaciya pamyati, ugashenie i zabyvanie: obzor literatury // Rossiyskiy psihologicheskiy zhurnal. 2023. T. 20, № 3. S. 131–156. https://doi.org/10.21702/rpj.2023.3.7
12. Barland G. H. The polygraph test in the USA and elsewhere // Gale A. (ed.). The polygraph test : Lies, truth, and science. London : SAGE Publications, 1988. P. 73–95.
13. Krapohl D. J. Paradigm shift: Searching for Trace Evidence in Human Memory // Police Chief. 2016 (February). P. 52–55.
14. Holodnyy Yu. I. Opros s ispol'zovaniem poligrafa i kompetenciya poligrafologa // Vestnik Akademii ekonomicheskoy bezopasnosti MVD Rossii. 2009. № 8. S. 58–64.
15. Komisarova Ya. V., Pelenicyn A. B., Fedorenko V. N. Metodicheskie rekomendacii po provedeniyu v ANO «CNKES» psihofiziologicheskogo issledovaniya s ispol'zovaniem poligrafa / Instrumental'naya detekciya lzhi: realii i perspektivy ispol'zovaniya v bor'be s prestupnost'yu : materialy Mezhdunarodnogo nauchno-prakticheskogo foruma, g. Saratov, 25–28 aprelya 2006 g. / pod red. V. N. Hrustaleva, L. N. Ivanova. Saratov : Saratovskiy yuridicheskiy institut MVD Rossii, 2006. S. 85–100.
16. Svobodnyy F. K. Psihofiziologicheskaya ekspertiza s ispol'zovaniem poligrafa ili psihologicheskaya ekspertiza informirovannosti lichnosti: priglashenie k diskussii // Vestnik Moskovskoy akademii Sledstvennogo komiteta Rossiyskoy Federacii. 2018. № 4 (18). S. 213–216.
